leadership responsibility


The difference between task, responsibility and ability to make decisions
Task, objectives
What is in fact my job? According to what objective criteria, objective recognition phenomena is my work evaluated? How sure am I that my inner job description in general terms agrees with the external job description? What is really expected from me? What are my own expectations: formed myself from general and previous experience, from my own imagination and power? Have I sufficiently assured myself that expectations of quality or quantity of work are neither too high nor too low?
The responsibility aspect must be just as substantial as the "task" aspect. No more and no less. The significance of interactions with superiors, staff, colleagues becomes particularly clear here: projects fail, errors crop up in general because they fall between the perceived responsibilities of those involved. These responsibility gaps or holes occur quickly as a result of misunderstandings or a lack of communication. Responsibility overlaps leads to interferences due to "territorial conflicts". The task of the manager is to maintain this balance despite constantly shifting borders
Decision-making ability
I require the decision-making ability required to measure up to the extent to which I’m responsible for a thing. Decision-making ability is gladly accepted. Responsibility gladly given away. Above all in cultures in which mistakes are handled with strong feelings of blame. Many fears and symptoms of bullying find their source and nourishment in this grey area between responsibility and decision-making ability. If, as an exception, a superior staff member corrects a decision made by a member of his staff, this can quickly lead to that member of staff giving up areas of responsibility.

What am I responsible for?
It makes sense to differentiate responsibility for action from leadership responsibility:
Responsibility for action:
Here I am fully responsible for my own actions
Leadership responsibility
I cannot bear responsibility for the actions of my staff to the same extent to which I bear responsibility for my own actions
Broadly we can define three areas for leadership responsibility
Leadership responsibility:
NDF (numbers, dates, facts).
Here I am responsible for the output, the results from my area of responsibility: ORO (outputs, results, objectives). I can be held to account if anomalies occur and I do not react. (When the question arises whether I am responsible as a manager for the functioning of the necessary feedback and controlling systems then this is more borderline.)
(Management by exception is the minimum requirement of managers/superiors)
Rules of the game
As a manager I am not only responsible for the results but also for the way in which this output is achieved. Even if there are no anomalies in the result, leadership responsibility applies if the rules of the game have not been adhered to: these are e.g. rules of information, communication, corporation and safety. The manager also has a duty here (not right) even when it comes to a "soft" breaking of the rules with no effect on output (everything turned out okay). We can differentiate between rules established by the organisation (workflows, chains of command, reporting duties etc) and rules arising from "social norms" (punctuality, rules of courtesy etc)
Staff development
I can also be held responsible if I can see changes coming and I do not quantitatively or qualitatively prepare my group/division for them. This can – where possible – be the hiring of staff and/or the training and development of my staff.
Sie sind interessiert an weiteren Themen rund um das Thema Führung? Wir bieten individuelle Programme für Führungskräfte und Inhouse-Programme für Unternehmen. Außerdem halten wir Vorträge rund um das Thema Führung und trainieren Trainer für das Leadion-Modell.

Posted in Allgemein.

Schreibe einen Kommentar

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert.